Voici donc comment Israël est devenu une autorité juridique internationale à laquelle la CIA s’est rapportée afin de légitimer la torture qu’elle pratique. Selon le site Times of Israel, après les attaques du 11 septembre 2001 la CIA a commencé à chercher des justifications juridiques pour des techniques coercitives d’interrogation.
Traduction : Info-Palestine.eu - Naguib
CIA used Israel to justify torture practices
CIA Torture: A Product of the Jewish Supremacist Takeover of America
PANAMZA | Torture post-11-Septembre : la responsable de la CIA est liée à la mouvance sioniste
INFO PANAMZA. Alfreda Frances Bikowsky, promotrice de la torture au sein de la CIA, est connectée aux réseaux pro-israéliens. Révélations.
ALARABY | US looks to Israel to justify torture
By: Vijay Prashad Date of publication 23 December, 2014
In the Senate report on CIA torture there is such a footnote. Early in the report’s more than five hundred pages, footnote 51 concerns the November 26, 2001 Draft of Legal Appendix, Hostile Interrogations: Legal Consideration for CIA Officers.
US law is fairly clear: torture is illegal in all cases... The Israeli judiciary has been kinder on torture. |
This draft memorandum, according to the Senate report, “cited the ‘Israeli example’ as a possible basis for arguing that ‘torture was necessary to prevent imminent, significant, physical harm to persons, where there is no other available means to prevent the harm.’”
In 2007, the CIA was worried: could they be held accountable for the torture their officers had been conducting at the so-called “black sites”?
Correspondence between the Principal Deputy Attorney General Steven Bradbury (of the US Justice Department) and Acting General Counsel of the CIA, John Rizzo, testifies to that anxiety. Rizzo sought justification in the “Israeli example.”
The US Congress had been discussing the McCain Amendment – to prohibit the “inhumane treatment of prisoners". Rizzo wrote there was a “striking” similarity between the US discussions and those held in Israel in 1999. Rizzo wrote the Israeli Supreme Court ruled “that several techniques were possibly permissible, but require some form of legislative sanction". He hoped Congress would provide such sanction. If not, Rizzo invoked the “necessity defense” – imported from Israel – that if it became necessary, it was acceptable to use torture.
Why did the CIA seek justification in the Israeli example? After all, says Laleh Khalili, author of Time in the Shadows, the CIA has its own history of torture. It was used in Latin America to decisive effect and enshrined in the CIA’s 1963 KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation manual.
That manual is not for the faint of heart. Its style makes torture appear decidedly banal – “the electric current should be known in advance, so that transformers and other modifying devices will be on hand if needed”, it notes in a section on electric shocks.
Sections of the current Senate report on Torture could very well have been lifted from the 1963 manual: detainees should be imprisoned “in a cell which has no light”; although “an environment still more subject to control, such as water-tank or iron lung, is even more effective". The more honest justification for CIA torture in the War on Terror should not have been in Israeli practice, but in what historian Greg Grandin calls “empire’s workshop", Latin America.
Nevertheless, Khalili notes, the CIA likely wanted legitimacy in the courts – Israeli if not American – rather than referring to its history. The Israeli Supreme Court is staffed by people who have had distinguished fellowships from Princeton and Harvard – “and whose supposedly liberal rulings nevertheless leave room for a range of methods of torture". It seemed an ideal place to seek a precedent.
Normal Torture
However, the 1999 Israeli Supreme Court ruling has a massive hole in it. It assumes that only in extraordinary circumstances can Israeli officials use torture. However, as lawyers for the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel confirm, there is “normal” torture and then “extraordinary” torture.
Lawyer Bana Shoughry-Badarne says that when she interviews Palestinians who have been released from Israel’s prisons, they often say that the treatment was ‘adi, normal or as usual. But what is usual for them has been described by attorney Lea Tsemel: “Almost every Palestinian who was interrogated can tell you about the sleep deprivation, the denial of access to a toilet or shower, the hunger, the physical pressures, including being made to sit tied to a small stool for days, the beatings and the kicks, the threats, the hanging, the bending, the shaking (sometimes) to death, etc.”
The sheer length of the list of routine tortures Tsemel rattles off should concern the reader.
The justification for CIA torture in the War on Terror should not have been Israel, but it's own history in Latin America. |
I asked Laleh Khalili if she saw any similarities between CIA torture techniques and the ‘adi methods of the GSS. She made a list for me: “placing people inside boxes in which they have to contort their bodies to fit; sleep-deprivation; food control; extremes of cold and hot. Dogs have been used in all cases, as has loud music and darkness. A mid-1990s lawsuit by two Lebanese detainees accused their jailers of using tools to anally rape the men, which is remarkably reminiscent of the 'rectal hydration' torture.”
Israel has its own Guantánamo: Camp 1391 – between Hadera and Afula in northern Israel. In 2009, the UN Committee Against Torture asked for access to this Camp, but their request was summarily denied. Remarkably, the Israeli Supreme Court has prevented any investigation of Israel’s Guantánamo. Unspeakable treatment of prisoners was the norm in 1391.
Shoughry-Badarne notes that none of the seven hundred complaints of torture made to the GSS authorities have resulted in any serious investigation, let alone criminal charges. In 2009 Israel’s High Court of Justice decreed that the Supreme Court ruling of a decade earlier was unenforceable. In other words, Israel’s policy of torture could continue without any legal barrier.
No wonder the CIA lawyers salivated over the Israeli example.
Psychologists met in secret with Bush officials to help justify torture
Après des années de mensonges, l'American Psychological Association s'excuse pour sa collaboration à la torture avec la CIA
Washington enterre le rapport de la CIA sur la torture
Washington Buries the CIA Torture Report
Torture in Israeli prisons: 200 methods used against Palestinian prisoners
CIA boss says 9/11 attacks justified CIA enhanced interrogations
Cheney on CIA Torture: “I’d do it again in a minute”
CIA torture: health professionals 'may have committed war crimes', report says
Torture: CIA “Enhanced Interrogations” Have a Long History
The Most Gruesome Moments in the CIA ‘Torture Report’
Imperialism and the Politics of Torture: Towards a Global Secret Police Force
Robert Fisk on the CIA 'torture report': Once again language is distorted in order to hide US state wrongdoing
Forget the redacted 'torture report', Abu Ghraib video shows young boys raped in front of their mothers
Hersh: Abu Ghraib video shows young boys raped in front of their mothers
RT: Leaked CIA report says targeted killing programs could backfire
VIDEO - RYDAWSON on PRESSTV: Leaked CIA reports say "targeted killings" unsuccessful
Right when the CIA started torturing people, Congress passed a law that said we would Invade the Netherlands if any US Citizen was tried in the International Criminal Court
US soldiers raped Iraqi boys in front of their mothers
L’arroseur Yankee arrosé: Kim Jong-Un demande à l'Onu de dénoncer les tortures de la CIA
Fox News analyst discussing torture report: 'The United States of America is awesome, we are awesome!'
How ‘Awesome’ Is America? The Neocon Media Rant
VIDEO - Jon Stewart Rips Dick Cheney on Torture : Is He ‘Righteous Warrior or a Psychopath?’
FLASHBACK: Douglas Feith Chickens Out Of Congressional Hearing On Torture (2008)
VIDEO - Rabbi Fischer: Jesus Would Support Torture
The Chanukah Miracle and CIA Torture
The Guardian accusé d'antisémitisme pour avoir choisi une photo de Bush devant un chandelier de la Hannoukha pour illustrer l'approbation de la torture par l'administration Bush:
Dec 14 2014
Guardian editorial condemning CIA torture curiously includes image of a Jewish menorah
The Observer (sister site of the Guardian) published an official editorial today (The Observer view on torture, Dec. 14) in response to a report issued by the US Senate Intelligence Committee into the CIA’s interrogation of terror suspects in the years after the 9/11 attacks.Whilst there’s nothing especially noteworthy in the editorial itself, which condemned “America’s most senior leaders, from former president George W Bush down”, for directing and condoning “the use of abhorrent illegal techniques against terrorism suspects that plainly amounted to torture”, the photo editors chose to accompany the piece is quite curious.
Guardian editors chose the photo of Bush in front of a menorah (from a 2008 White House Hanukkah ceremony) despite the absence of any references to Jews in the text, and the fact that the media group no doubt has countless other photos of the former president – which don’t include eye-catching symbols evoking one particular religion which isn’t the focus of the editorial – that they could have used instead.
No, we’re not accusing the Guardian of antisemitism, just extremely poor editorial judgment.
By Adam Levick • Posted in Guardian
Bush “Intimately Involved” with Torture, “Fully Briefed on All CIA Tactics in 2002″: Former Strategist Karl Rove
2007: Collateral Damage - Israel, An interrogation role model
VIDEO - DAVID DUKE: Who Taught America to Torture? This video will shock any American and well it should. It is not the America that we middle-aged grew up in. The architects of the new America are destroying every value sacred to our Forefathers.
Le véritable cerveau des opérations à Abou Ghraib se nommait en fait John Israel. Ce n'est pas un nom irlandais ou italien...
What Are Those Contractors Doing in Iraq?
But Taguba's report also mentions four civilian contractors, all of whom were assigned to the 205th Military Intelligence Brigade. Two of those civilians, Steven Stephanowicz and, John Israel, were "either directly or indirectly responsible for the abuses" at Abu Ghraib, the report says.
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/595063333/Oversight-of-military-contractors-fraught-with-difficulty.html
Contractors Implicated in Prison Abuse Remain on the Job
(...)The other contractor implicated, John Israel, identified as a civilian translator assigned to the same brigade, is described in one place in the Army report as a CACI employee and in another as an employee of Titan, which provides translators for the Army throughout Iraq.(...)
Army Discloses Criminal Inquiry on Prison Abuse
Ralph Williams, a spokesman for the Titan Corporation in San Diego, said Tuesday that John Israel, one of the contract employees implicated in the prison abuse scandal, worked for a Titan subcontractor that he would not name.
The Army's classified report on the abuse at Abu Ghraib identifies Mr. Israel as a translator who was, with others, "directly or indirectly responsible for the abuses" at the prison and recommended "immediate disciplinary action."
Article disparu du web:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004May8.html
What Are Those Contractors Doing in Iraq?
By Deborah Avant
Sunday, May 9, 2004; Page B01
The alleged U.S. abuses at Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad, and the suggestion that contract employees may have been among those responsible, has cast a spotlight on the military's extraordinary reliance on civilian contractors to perform even the most sensitive jobs. Consider this: During the first Gulf War, U.S. forces employed one civilian contractor in Iraq for every 60 active-duty personnel. At the start of the current Iraq war, that figure was about one in 10.
Contractors, in Iraq and elsewhere, are doing a lot more than building and maintaining camps, preparing food and doing laundry for troops. They support M1 tanks and Apache helicopters on the battlefield; they train American forces, Army ROTC units and even foreign militaries under contract to the United States. And they have flooded into Iraq to provide the military with security and crime prevention services. Having closely followed this explosion of military contracting since the end of the Cold War, I thought I knew the extent of it. But I have to admit that I did not know the government was also outsourcing the interrogation of military prisoners.
The information was far from secret. Indeed, CACI International, a defense firm based in Arlington whose employees were implicated in an Army investigation in February and in a subsequent report by Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba, had advertised on its Web site for interrogators in Iraq. Thousands of such contracts are issued by a long list of offices within the Pentagon, and even by the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) in Baghdad, to a wide range of companies for innocuous-sounding services. (The prisoner interrogators were hired under an "intelligence services" category.) This illustrates some of the difficulties in tracking what has become a vast web of military contracting.
When the United States deploys its military forces, the process is easily understood: Active or reserve officers, who report up the chain of command to the president according to rules set by Congress and governed by the Uniform Code of Military Justice, go overseas. The media cover deployments and the public is informed. But there are no standard procedures for deploying private security workers under military contracts, which makes it far more difficult to gather information about who they are, what they're doing and for whom. They are not part of the military command; they are not covered by the code of military justice.
The events of the last few days illustrate those differences well. When reports of abuses at Abu Ghraib surfaced, it was clear that the 800th Military Police Brigade (which includes the 372nd Military Police Company, home to many of the accused) was in charge of the prison; prisoner interrogations were run by the 205th Military Intelligence Brigade. But Taguba's report also mentions four civilian contractors, all of whom were assigned to the 205th Military Intelligence Brigade. Two of those civilians, Steven Stephanowicz and John Israel, were "either directly or indirectly responsible for the abuses" at Abu Ghraib, the report says. A third contractor, Adel Nakhla, is named as a translator -- and a suspect. A fourth, Torin Nelson, was said to be a witness. Both Nakhla and Nelson are listed as employees of Titan Corp., a security contractor based in San Diego.
The report identified Stephanowicz as an interrogator working for CACI; Israel, an interpreter, was also said to be working for CACI, although the company has denied that. Some news reports have identified Israel as an employee of Titan, which in turn has said he works for one of its subcontractors.
So, we are not even sure for whom these contractors work or worked. Nor do we know how many other contract employees were -- and may still be -- working at the prison. (In his testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Friday, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld put the number of contract interrogators and linguists at Abu Ghraib at about 40; other Pentagon officials cited different figures in their testimony.) We do not know precisely what roles these contract employees had at the prison or to which group or agency they were accountable. To trace that, we would need to know the contracting agent -- someone representing a group within the Army, probably, but which one? Military Intelligence? The Iraqi Survey Group (a Defense Intelligence Agency unit responsible for investigating weapons of mass destruction and reportedly in charge of the most important Iraqi prisoners)?
And how would civilians such as Stephanowicz and Israel have become such a dominant force at a military facility? To whom did they answer on a daily basis? We cannot simply consider where they sat in the chain of command (as we can with military forces). We need to know who issued the contract and what it said. And that is not easy information to obtain.
A General Accounting Office review of contracted military services last year cited problems stemming from this lack of information. The agency's report, which focused on services delivered in the Balkans and Southwest Asia, found that Department of Defense management of contractors varied widely. Smooth operations require that commanders in the field be able to oversee contractors, but in fact the officer who is expected to ensure that a company meets the terms of its contract may be back in the United States. Field commanders have no easy way to find out what exactly a contractor has been sent to do. All of this makes oversight difficult even among the executive agencies that hire private security.
These problems with oversight in Iraq are not limited to Abu Ghraib prison. While we know how many military forces are in the country, even the federal government doesn't seem to know how many contractors are there. In an April 2 letter to Rumsfeld, Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) requested information about the number of private security personnel and their role in Iraq. In a May 4 letter in response, L. Paul Bremer, head of the CPA, put that number at "approximately 20,000," most of whom, he said, were under contract to Iraqi companies or foreign private companies -- not to American forces. His list of the private security companies working in Iraq, though, included neither CACI nor Titan, which suggests that the real number may be far higher.
The uncertainties extend to the handling of suspected crimes. In the wake of allegations of abuse at the prison, Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, commander of the 800th MP Brigade, was admonished and suspended; six others have been reprimanded; one has been admonished; and six additional soldiers face more serious charges. We can argue about whether this is an adequate response, but at least we know what the response is.
Months after Taguba issued his report to the Pentagon's central command, we still don't know what legal action, if any, the civilian contractors may face. CACI claims that it has not been contacted formally by the Army on this matter, and its employees are still working in Iraq. The Pentagon now says that it began an investigation of the Military Intelligence Brigade, civilian contractors and the Iraqi Survey Group -- but not until April 24. What accounts for the delay? And where are these civilian contractors in the meantime? Are they still working in the prison?
It is also hard to gauge how individuals employed by contracting companies might be prosecuted. (See the article below.) The government could prosecute the company or companies that employed them under the Federal Acquisition Regulations for material breach, which includes criminal behavior by employees. The companies could also be prevented from bidding on future U.S. contracts.
Congress is justifiably concerned about the abuses that may have been committed by American forces. Congressional questions about the role of contractors, though, also illustrate the high hurdle Congress faces in overseeing contracts. While Congress has access to the ins and outs of the military -- indeed, it passes the laws under which the military is regulated -- its access to information about contracts (in Iraq and elsewhere) is more circumscribed.
For example, the United States often hires contractors to train foreign militaries, but the annual consolidated report on military assistance and sales, which informs Congress about foreign training efforts, does not include information on which companies are conducting the training or what precisely they are being paid to do. This is simply the nature of contracting. Indeed, while some critics say that Congress should increase its oversight, keeping track of contracts and subcontracts among many agencies and from countless companies would be a huge job and require a dramatic (and costly) change in congressional oversight.
Individual citizens have even less access to such information. Government reporting (and media coverage) on the war in Iraq focuses on military forces. The word "soldier" evokes a set of common understandings. It is harder to comprehend the structure of military contractors, their relationship with other contractors and their involvement in so many different military jobs. Even the language is confusing. When four private security contractors were brutally killed and mutilated in Fallujah, some Americans heard "contractors" and imagined that they were construction workers, not armed guards.
The alleged Abu Ghraib abuses raise central questions about the training of U.S. forces and the chain of command, questions that rightly dominate the current national discussion. Yet the role of military contractors adds an important new dimension that should encourage more searching questions about this march toward privatizing military services and its implications for what is knowable about how sensitive military jobs are being performed -- and whether adequate controls are in place for the innumerable private contractors who are now doing a soldier's job.
Follow torture trail at Abu Ghraib The re-writing of Iraqi history is now going on at supersonic speed
By Robert Fisk 05/26/04
Steven Stefanowicz (Wikipedia)
The Israeli Torture Template Rape, Feces and Urine-Dipped Cloth Sacks Rape, Feces and Urine-Dipped Cloth Sacks May 10, 2004
Private Contractors and the Reconstruction of Iraq: Transforming Military Logistics (Search: Stephanowicz, John Israel)
The Iraq Papers, by John Ehrenberg (Search: Stephanowicz, John Israel)
The Iraq War: A Documentary and Reference Guide, by Thomas R. Mockaitis (Search: Stephanowicz)
The "Taguba Report" On Treatment Of Abu Ghraib Prisoners In Iraq (Search: Stephanowicz, John Israel)
Tuesday, May 11, 2004
In exchange for interrogation training, did Washington award security contracts?
By Ali Abunimah Special to The Daily Star
CHICAGO, Illinois: The head of the American defense contracting firm implicated in the torture of Iraqis at Abu Ghraib prison has close ties to Israel and visited an Israeli "anti-terror" training camp in the occupied West Bank earlier this year.
Truthseekers.com:
APART from the failings
of the senior officers who should have
done more to prevent the abuse, General
Taguba names four individuals as key
suspects.
"Specifically," Taguba wrote, "I
suspect that Col. Thomas M. Pappas, LTC
Steve L. Jordan, Mr. Steven
Stephanowicz, and Mr. John
Israel were either directly or
indirectly responsible for the abuses at
Abu Ghraib and strongly recommend
immediate disciplinary action."
Jordan is former director of the Joint
Interrogation and Debriefing Center and
Liaison Officer to the 205th MI
Brigade.
Stephanowicz is a "civilian
interrogator" employed by CACI
International of Chantilly, Va., and
"John Israel" is said to be a "civilian
interpreter."
Both were working with the 205th MI
Brigade at the time of the abuse.
According to the report these private
contractors were at times supervising the
interrogations.
"In general," Taguba wrote, "U.S.
civilian contract personnel (Titan Corp.,
CACI, etc.) third country nationals, and
local contractors do not appear to be
properly supervised within the detention
facility at Abu Ghraib."
The third country nationals are not
identified in the report.
Although Stephanowicz and Israel are
both named as being "directly or
indirectly responsible for the abuses at
Abu Ghraib," very little has been said
about either of them in the mainstream
media. Why are they being overlooked?
|
"to promote opportunities for strategic partnerships and joint ventures between US and Israeli defense and homeland security companies."
"allowed and/or instructed MPs (military police), who were not trained in interrogation techniques, to facilitate interrogations by 'setting conditions' which were neither authorized or in accordance with applicable regulations/policy. He clearly knew his instructions equated to physical abuse."
Although Taguba recommended that Stephanowicz be terminated and his security clearance revoked, a May 5 [2004] statement from CACI confirmed, "at present, all CACI employees continue to work on site providing the contracted for services to our clients in that location." It added: "We have not received any information to stop any of our work, to terminate or suspend any of our employees."
"In January and February (2003), Israeli and American troops trained together in southern Israel's Negev Desert ... Israel has also hosted senior law enforcement officials from the United States for a seminar on counterterrorism."
davidduke.com | Remember the Torture at Abu Ghraib?
. . .The investigators, he said, “would put a black hood over the accused’s head and then punch him in the face with brass knuckles, kick him and beat him with rubber hoses. . . . All but two of the Germans, in the 139 cases we investigated, had been kicked in the testicles beyond repair.”
Even American military hero George S. Patton weighed in on the whole process saying:The entire atmosphere is unwholesome. . . . Lawyers, clerks, interpreters and researchers were employed who became Americans only in recent years, whose backgrounds were embedded in Europe’s hatreds and prejudices.
I am frankly opposed to this war criminal stuff. It is not cricket and is Semitic. I am also opposed to sending POW’s to work as slaves in foreign lands, where many will be starved to death. (The Patton Papers by Blumenthal)
Under Lenin, Jews became involved in all aspects of the Revolution, including its dirtiest work. Despite the Communists’ vows to eradicate Anti-Semitism, it spread rapidly after the revolution — partly because of the prominence of so many Jews in the Soviet administration, as well as in the traumatic, inhuman Sovietization drives that followed. Historian Salo Baron has noted that an immensely disproportionate number of Jews joined the new Soviet secret police, the Cheka…. And many of those who fell afoul of the Cheka would be shot by Jewish investigators.
A feature article by Joel Greenburg in the very pro-Israel New York Times titled “Israel Rethinks Interrogation of Arabs”, stated matter-of-factly that Israel tortures 500 to 600 Palestinians every month. That figure, which is probably too low as it comes from the pro-Israel New York Times, means that each year at least 6,000 Palestinians are tortured in Israel. Torture of Palestinians has been going on in Israel since 1948. Even if one uses just one-half of the number of Palestinians that Mr. Greenburg says suffer torture each year — at least 150,000 human beings have been tortured in Israeli jails since the founding of the Jewish state, and likely the numbers are a lot higher.
the occupation of Iraq and George Bush’s unprecedented alliance with the right wing government of Israel has placed Americans overseas in danger.
We know that the Israeli intelligence was operating in Baghdad after the war was over. The question should be: Were there any foreign interrogators among those that were recommending very, very bad treatment for the prisoners?
And let’s cast our eyes upon that little, all-important matter of responsibility. The actual interrogators accused of encouraging U.S. troops to abuse Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib jail were working for at least one company with extensive military and commercial contacts with Israel. The head of an American company whose personnel are implicated in the Iraqi tortures, it now turns out, attended an “anti-terror” training camp in Israel and, earlier this year, was presented with an award by Shaul Mofaz, the right-wing Israeli defense minister…In the torture report by U.S. Gen. Antonio Taguba refers to “third country nationals” involved in the mistreatment of prisoners in Iraq.Taguba mentions Steven Staphanovic and John Israel as involved in the abuses at Abu Ghraib. Staphanovic, who worked for CACI — known to the U.S. military as “Khaki” — was said by Taguba to have “allowed and/or instructed MPs (military police), who were not trained in interrogation techniques, to facilitate interrogations by ‘setting conditions’ … he clearly knew his instructions equated to physical abuse.” One of Staphanovic’s co-workers, Joe Ryan — who was not named in the Taguba report — now says he underwent an “Israeli interrogation course” before going to Iraq…
The American in charge of Abu Ghraib itself, Gen. Janis Karpinski, claimed that Israeli interrogators were in Iraq
FBI agents back up abuse allegations
December 21, 2004 in the Detroit Free Press
BY CAROL ROSENBERG and FRANK DAVIES
KNIGHT RIDDER NEWSPAPERS
MIAMI — FBI agents in the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, witnessed abuses of prisoners that included being left in their own feces, chained in ice-cold or super-hot cells and other interrogation techniques that caused one prisoner to pull his hair from his head, documents released Monday show…
The agents’ accounts, contained in e-mails to their superiors to distance the FBI from the behavior, are the first by U.S. officials confirming Guantanamo prisoners’ complaints of sleep deprivation, temperature manipulations, strobe lights and loud music…
Yet on July 30, in one of the e-mails the American Civil Liberties Union made available Monday, an FBI agent wrote that he had seen an almost identical event at the prison, describing, among other things, a prisoner draped in an Israeli flag…
In August, a Boston-based agent described incidents such as this: “I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position on the floor, with no chair, food or water. Most times, they had urinated or defecated on themselves and had been left there for 18-24 hours or more.
Meet David Cohen: The Jewish ‘sanctions guru’ appointed deputy chief of the CIA
As David Cohen becomes CIA’s No. 2, Jews appear to have smoother sailing at security agencies
David Cohen Becomes the CIA's 'Financial Batman' Fighting Terrorism With Balance Sheets and Ledgers
Meet David Cohen: The Jewish ‘sanctions guru’ appointed deputy chief of the CIA
Sur ce blog:
Wolfowitz a assoupli la loi pour faire avancer le programme d'expérimentation sur les détenus
Les maîtres sionistes ont enseigné la torture aux forces états-uniennes
Experts en torture ! Le véritable cerveau des opérations à Abou Ghraib se nommait en fait John Israel.
La science et le futur de la torture
Les États-Unis négocient avec les terroristes: "Libérez Pollard en échange du gel de la colonisation [illégale]"
Israël assassine des présumés terroristes en sol américain
Avigdor Liberman veut retirer la citoyenneté aux Arabes, Joe Liberman veut retirer la citoyenneté aux présumés terroristes
Le croisé anti-terrorisme Lieberman lié à un groupe pro-terrorisme
Les rabbins pourraient être formés pour combattre le terrorisme
Le sioniste orthodoxe Joe Lieberman et le projet de loi visant la suppression des droits constitutionnels des personnes soupçonnées de terrorisme
Le Congrès juif et les alertes de sécurité
Ils seront en sécurité
Etes-vous un terroriste de la paix?
Cela doit rester ainsi
S-7--le Patriot Act canadien: déclaration de guerre ouverte contre le peuple
Les compagnies de surveillance ne cessent de croître et de s'enrichir
Washington Post: l'industrie du renseignement lié à la guerre au terrorisme est un monstre qui ne cesse de croître de manière incontrôlable
Harcèlement policier, inculpations préventives et torture contre de faux ennemis Musulmans... Nationalistes: VOUS êtes les prochains!
Brochette de sionistes juifs néocons, au bien cuit de Dick Cheney
L'avocat de la torture Alan Dershowitz convainc Obama d'empêcher Jimmy Carter à la convention démocrate de 2008
Professeur de torture: Alan Dershowitz à la défense du "waterboarding" (2007)
"Guerre" (occupation, massacre et torture) en Afghanistan
Torture supervisée: le gouvernement canadien remet plus de 2500 documents censurés
Simulacre de procès et torture à Nuremberg
Ce « modèle israélien » de lutte contre le terrorisme qui fascine politiciens et médias français
Une technique de torture développée et utilisée par Israël qui ressemble fortement à la position des sacrifiés humains des anciens Mayas: